Socioeconomic distribution of cancer of the female sex organs in new haven

Race/Ethnicity and Changing US Socioeconomic Gradients in Breast Cancer Incidence: California and Massachusetts, 1978–2002 (United States)

“…The finding of at most a modest socioeconomic gradient among the US white non-Hispanic and black women, the two groups with the highest rates of breast cancer incidence in the US, is consistent with the initial study hypothesis, given higher socioeconomic gradients reported for these groups in earlier time periods [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]. The implication is that class differences in risk of breast cancer among these groups have narrowed considerably, likely for reasons described at the outset involving changes in reproductive history and anthropometry [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]31].…”

“…The implication is that class differences in risk of breast cancer among these groups have narrowed considerably, likely for reasons described at the outset involving changes in reproductive history and anthropometry [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]31]. Ideally, had it been possible to obtain and geocode US cancer registry data prior to the 1970s (i.e., prior to the establishment of a national system of cancer registries), we could have ascertained the periods of sharpest decline and onset of the subsequent plateau in the socioeconomic gradient.…”

“…To date, however, only a relatively small numbers of population-based studies, in the US [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] and elsewhere [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] have attempted to quantify the socioeconomic gradient in breast cancer incidence, using a variety of socioeconomic measures, either at a given point in time or, in a handful of cases, over time [17,28]. Considered together, these limited data suggest that over the course of the 20th century, in both the US and other affluent industrialized countries, the breast cancer socioeconomic gradient appears to have diminished, dropping from a relative risk exceeding 2.0 down to one nearly equal to 1.0, comparing the most to least affluent women, with this shift largely due to rates catching up among less affluent women [31] If true, such a decline would have major implications for not only public perceptions of and policies to address breast cancer, but also the population burden of breast cancer mortality, given strong associations between economic deprivation and shortened survival once diagnosed [1,22].…”

Social inequalities in cancer survival

“…Whereas wealth may be linked with a high risk of developing cancer -because affluence, for example, may tend to induce some unhealthy dietary habits -the survival rate among the socially advantaged may well be quite high. In fact, such a pattern of social gradients appeared very clearly in a recent register-based study of prostate cancer in Norwegian men (Harvei and Kravdal 1997).Social determinants of cancer survival have received much attention (although less than those of cancer incidence) since the early studies by, for example, Cohart (1955), who provided a rough description of gross differences between rich and poor regions. (For another example of a quite early, but much more thorough study, see Berg et al(1977).)…”

“…Social determinants of cancer survival have received much attention (although less than those of cancer incidence) since the early studies by, for example, Cohart (1955), who provided a rough description of gross differences between rich and poor regions. (For another example of a quite early, but much more thorough study, see Berg et al(1977).)…”